There are more people on both sides of the IQ bell curve in the U.S. than there are in Europe. By Europe I am referring to Western Europe. And yes, the U.S. is a lot more diverse which has never been a good thing.

Every bell curve is a graph of how a population behaves or what characteristics it has. It doesn’t matter how many people are in it. It’s always the same—the majoity of the people will always be in the middle no matter which population you are referring to. That’s what a bell curve is. It shows normal distribution and that’s all it shows. There can’t be more people on each side, no matter what you are trying to show. The distribution within any bell curve is always the same.

Lois

Yes, the majority will always be in the middle, but that doesn’t imply the bell will be shaped the same way in all occasions. Some bell curves will be taller and narrower than others and their centre will fall in different places on the spectrum.

The graphs have nothing to do with racial inequalities. What it shows is that people don’t care (or care less) for people of different races. A Swede is more likely to share his wealth with a poor Swede than a white American is to share his money with a poor black American, or a white American is more likely to share his wealth with a poor white American than he is to share his money with a poor black American.

Now that we are in agreement about persistent racial seperations and its resulting economic inequality, we can cite the phrase “all men are created equal” which is the fundamental principle of the United States Declaration of Independence, don’t you agree?.

wiki;

The quotation “All men are created equal” has been called an “immortal declaration”, and “perhaps [the] single phrase” and popularized as “theory of prediction” of the United States Revolutionary period with the greatest “continuing importance”.[1][2] Thomas Jefferson first used the phrase in the Declaration of Independence. It was thereafter quoted or incorporated into speeches by a wide array of substantial figures in American political and social life in the United States. The final form of the phrase was stylized by Benjamin Franklin.

That noble concept sounds a little hollow, when you cite a Swede favors Swedes, and then compare it to White Americans favor White Amerians over Black Americans. Aren’t all Americans, Americans as all Swedes are Swedes, black or white?

Signature

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.W4U

I think what Jefferson meant to say is that all men (except for his mistress) should have the same legal rights. Men are obviously not created equal.

I agree, but then the question arises if all the rich are more than equal to all others or if the focus has shifted from respecting legal rights to ignoring legal rights of others regardless of racial preference or ability.

Examples may be found in the Halliburton Loophole to air and water regulations (and getting richer), while ignoring the legal rights of al other neighboring people, black and white alike. Is that a matter of natural inequality, or inequality in the observance and exercise of legal rights.

IMO, if the current news from New Jersey about possible “quid pro quo” governance is or becomes the interpretation of legal equality, we no longer have a democracy but an autocracy and the concept of equality, legal or otherwise, becomes moot.

And I am sure that the recent statistic in the rate of incarceration of black people over white people for the same offense does not speak for legal equality either.

Signature

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.W4U